[ExI] Zombie glutamate
brent.allsop at canonizer.com
Sun Feb 15 03:31:35 UTC 2015
On 2/14/2015 6:19 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Sunday, February 15, 2015, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com
> <mailto:johnkclark at gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com
> > What you can prove is that IF a being is conscious THEN its
> functional equivalent would also be conscious.
> But the only being I can prove to be conscious is myself, and
> unfortunately that proof is available to nobody but me.
> Indeed, but the statement Imade is still valid. It means you can open
> a brain prosthesis business with the guarantee that if you look after
> the technical aspects, any consciousness that was there will be
> preserved. Of course, if there wasn't any consciousness there to start
> with there won't be any afterwards either, but that is consistent with
> the guarantee.
Anyone want to bet that you guys forgot the YET, and that it will be
"proven" in less than 10 years and that there will be a near 99% of all
expert consensus that it has been "proven" as powerfully as evolution,
or any other such now agree on scientific "fact", as predicted science
will verify in the paper?
Stathis, would you not agree that the word red, has nothing to do with a
redness quality, other than it has interpretation hardware somewhere
interpereting it as if it was redness, or back to the real "functional
isomorph" or whatever? In other words, certainly you agree that zombie
informaiton is a real thing. So why could you not completely reproduce
a system that can beahve in any way you desire, yet still, by
definition, since it is operating on zombie information (does not have
the same salty or red quale) yet as long as it has the correct
interpretation hardware, it can still map or model, anything you want.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat